Mike the Mad BiologistJust another site2011-09-01T09:03:48Zhttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/feed/atom/WordPressMikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/09/01/program-announcement-im-moving/2011-09-01T09:03:48Z2011-09-01T09:03:48ZI’ve dropped some hints in the past that my relationship with ScienceBlogs would be…altered.

Well, I’ve decided to leave. Mostly, it had to do with the issue of pseudonymity, although I’m very excited to hang out my own shingle once again. I don’t want to rehash the issue of pseudonymity, sinceothershavedone that quite well, but revealing the Mad Biologist’s Top Sekrit identity just wasn’t in the cards.

I want to make something clear. ScienceBlogs/NatGeo really did try to keep me. For some crazy reason, they seem to like the writing–I won’t get into the details, but that really does seem to be the case. My impression is that they are not trying to ‘hollow out’ ScienceBlogs (or, at least, they weren’t trying to ‘hollow out’ me). I understand why a corporation like National Geographic wouldn’t want to have pseudonymous writers, even though it’s not compatible with how I want to play it.

Finally, I want to thank the many people who have worked at ScienceBlogs. It all started with Katherine Sharpe who recruited me. I remember my first conversation with her, and when she invited me, I asked her, “Are you sure you want me? You have read my blog, right?” Since that time, no one at ScienceBlogs ever told me what to write, or ruled anything off limits (and, at times, I’m certain it showed…). It was truly a wonderful concept: invite scientists–working scientists trained in data analysis and experimentation–to write about, well, anything and everything. Adam Bly really wasn’t far off the mark with the ‘science is culture’ motto. It was an exciting and innovative thing while it lasted.

]]>21Mikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/09/01/note-to-unions-this-is-not-how/2011-09-01T07:55:01Z2011-09-01T07:55:01ZThe old saw that ‘we hang together or we get hung separately‘ is a perfect description of how the left has disintegrated into irrelevance. Too often, groups will focus on modest gains for their own narrow constituency, while selling out other allies. Over the long term, each component of the coalition is so weakened, making it impossible to have any influence. Case in point: union support for the Keystone XL pipeline (which will ship oil extracted from tar sands in Canada). John Aravosis explains:

But I’d like to highlight the environment vs. “jobs” controversy, and the union’s role in this progressive-coalition-killing discussion:

But the project’s advocates — including United Association general president William Hite, whose union represents plumbers and pipefitters in North America — said it would employ thousands of Americans while supplying oil from a close ally. “It’s a job engine for the country at a time when we need the jobs, and until we do something else, we need the oil,” Hite said in an interview. “I don’t see how we can turn it down.”

How can we help you, Mr Union-collaborator-in-your-own-destruction, when you won’t begin to help yourselves? I mean that seriously.

While a fair number of the protestors will still support unions in principle, they will remember this. And when unions need non-union left wing support, it won’t be very strong, it will be just going through the motions. Republicans and their allies get this, while career Democrats and their allied organizations don’t (NARAL is a classic example of this).

Keep in mind, a fair number of unions do the right thing. Nurses unions have supported a wide array of liberal causes (and are very popular as a result).

Imagine if the plumbers and pipefitters had opposed this–even though it would come at a cost to them. Either the Obama administration would back down, strengthening their natural allies, or, it would go ahead anyway. In the latter case, the jobs would still be there, but unions would be viewed as staunch allies by those on the left who aren’t unionized. And please don’t play the ‘long run’ game card. Unions can’t think that, in return for collaborating with the administration, that they’ll receive action on card check legislation or elimination of Taft-Hartley. There is no long run game without a broad coalition.

Today, American high schools offer a sequence of algebra, geometry, more algebra, pre-calculus and calculus (or a “reform” version in which these topics are interwoven). This has been codified by the Common Core State Standards, recently adopted by more than 40 states. This highly abstract curriculum is simply not the best way to prepare a vast majority of high school students for life.

For instance, how often do most adults encounter a situation in which they need to solve a quadratic equation? Do they need to know what constitutes a “group of transformations” or a “complex number”? Of course professional mathematicians, physicists and engineers need to know all this, but most citizens would be better served by studying how mortgages are priced, how computers are programmed and how the statistical results of a medical trial are to be understood.

What the authors call for is an applied approach to teaching math:

A math curriculum that focused on real-life problems would still expose students to the abstract tools of mathematics, especially the manipulation of unknown quantities. But there is a world of difference between teaching “pure” math, with no context, and teaching relevant problems that will lead students to appreciate how a mathematical formula models and clarifies real-world situations. The former is how algebra courses currently proceed — introducing the mysterious variable x, which many students struggle to understand. By contrast, a contextual approach, in the style of all working scientists, would introduce formulas using abbreviations for simple quantities — for instance, Einstein’s famous equation E=mc2, where E stands for energy, m for mass and c for the speed of light.

Imagine replacing the sequence of algebra, geometry and calculus with a sequence of finance, data and basic engineering. In the finance course, students would learn the exponential function, use formulas in spreadsheets and study the budgets of people, companies and governments. In the data course, students would gather their own data sets and learn how, in fields as diverse as sports and medicine, larger samples give better estimates of averages. In the basic engineering course, students would learn the workings of engines, sound waves, TV signals and computers.

I have no idea if this would work. It sounds good, but I would like to see some data (I know similar approaches have been tried before, with mixed results). The other concern is that this approach has been used in Finland:

A plausible hypothesis stems from differences in the content of the two tests. The content of PISA is a better match with Finland’s curriculum than is the TIMSS content. The objective of TIMSS is to assess what students have learned in school. Thus, the content of the test reflects topics in mathematics that are commonly taught in the world’s school systems. Traditional domains of mathematics–algebra, geometry, operations with numbers–are well represented on TIMSS.

The objective of PISA, in contrast, is not to assess achievement “in relation to the teaching and learning of a body of knowledge.” As noted above, that same objective motivates attaching the term “literacy” to otherwise universally recognized school subjects. Jan de Lange, the head of the mathematics expert group for PISA, explains, “Mathematics curricula have focused on school-based knowledge whereas mathematical literacy involves mathematics as it is used in the real world.” PISA’s Schleicher often draws a distinction between achievement tests (presumably including TIMSS) that “look back at what students were expected to have learned” and PISA, which “looks ahead to how well they can extrapolate from what they have learned and apply their knowledge and skills in novel settings.”

The emphasis on learner-centered, collaborative instruction and a future oriented, relevant curriculum that focuses on creativity and problem solving has made PISA the international test for reformers promoting constructivist learning and 21st-century skills. Finland implemented reforms in the 1990s and early 2000s that embraced the tenets of these movements. Several education researchers from Finland have attributed their nation’s strong showing to the compatibility of recent reforms with the content of PISA.

In other words, Finland does well on the PISA test because PISA reflects Finland’s educational goals (interestingly, many Finnish mathematics university professors think those goals leave Finnish students woeful underprepared for college math, but that’s a whole separate discussion).

Over 300 Finnish college mathematics professors signed a statement decrying the adoption of a ‘constructivist’ mathematics curriculum. I have no idea what percentage of Finnish mathematicians that is, but Finland’s population is smaller than Massachusetts’, so it’s probably most of them.

]]>1Mikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/08/30/gop-response-to-hurricane-iren/2011-08-30T09:55:01Z2011-08-30T09:55:01ZThey’re getting pretty good at hostage taking, and it worked before. Alex Seitz-Wald reports:

Despite the devastation caused by Hurricane Irene this weekend, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) today stood by his call that no more money be allocated for disaster relief unless it is offset by spending cuts elsewhere. The Washington Post reported this morning that FEMA will need more money than it currently has to deal with the storm’s aftermath and is already diverting funds from other recent disasters to deal with the hurricane, but Cantor’s comments suggest Republicans won’t authorize more funds without a fight….

Cantor referred a bill the Republican-controlled House passed that approves $1 billion in disaster relief, which was financed by a $1.5 billion cut from loan program to encourage the production of fuel-efficient vehicles. But the need in the wake of the hurricane will likely greatly surpass $1 billion, and that spending package was supposed to be used for tornado recovery efforts, for which several hundred million dollars has already been outlayed.

The recent disaster in upstate New York, Vermont, and parts of North Carolina and Massachusetts show just how stupid and irresponsible imposing a de facto gold standard through spending caps is.
People need help, and we are artificially limiting the response due to false currency limitations. The ~$700 million Cantor proposes will only be a small fraction needed to repair the damage.

If the president and the Congressional Democrats don’t call this what it is–morally degenerate hostage taking–then what damn good are they? They need to be partisan, since there is one side trying to be responsible and perform the basic functions of government, while the other (Republicans) is being irresponsible and cruel. If Democrats can’t figure out a way to make this case to the American people, then they aren’t worth our support.

Can we sue for political malpractice?

]]>7Mikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/08/29/links-82911/2011-08-29T17:02:14Z2011-08-29T17:02:14ZNot much of a storm, at least in Boston. Let’s celebrate with some links. Science:

]]>1Mikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/08/29/not-too-much-storm-damage-in-b/2011-08-29T12:01:49Z2011-08-29T12:01:49ZFortunately, Irene just ended up resembling a bad nor’easter, but without the cold temperatures (or snow). We had high winds from about 9:30 – 10:30am, and if they had become progressively worse (as was predicted), it could have been pretty ugly. Didn’t turn out that way thankfully. In fact, it looks very clean out there. Still some clean up is needed:

]]>1Mikehttp://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/08/29/goverment-jobs-are-bad-but-gov/2011-08-29T10:01:28Z2011-08-29T10:01:28ZOne of the ludicrous notions that has infected our political discourse is that government jobs aren’t ‘real’ jobs (tell that to fireman when your house is burning down…). But a lot of private sector jobs are heavily subsidized by the government. I’m not referring to private contractors hired by the government, but jobs that are supposedly private sector. Low wage private sector jobs. How are these jobs subsidized? Food stamps (now known as SNAP; italics mine):

Saucedo, who earns $9.70 an hour for about 26 hours a week and lives with her mother, is one of the many Americans who survive because of government handouts in what has rapidly become a food stamp nation.

Altogether, there are now almost 46 million people in the United States on food stamps, roughly 15 percent of the population. That’s an increase of 74 percent since 2007, just before the financial crisis and a deep recession led to mass job losses….

While there are clearly some cases of abuse by people who claim food stamps but don’t really need them, for many Americans like Saucedo there is little current alternative if they are to put food on the table while paying rent and utility bills.

“It’s kind of sad that even though I’m working that I need to have government assistance. I have asked them to please put me on full-time so I can have benefits,” said the 32-year-old.

She’s worked at Wal-Mart for nine months, and applied for food stamps as soon as her probation ended. She said plenty of her colleagues are in the same situation.

So are her customers. Bill Simon, head of Wal-Mart’s U.S. operations, told a conference call last Tuesday that the company had seen an increase in the number of shoppers relying on government assistance for food.

About forty percent of food stamp recipients are, like Saucedo, in households in which at least one member of the family earns wages. Many more could be eligible: the government estimates one in three who could be on the program are not.

“If they’re working, they often think they can’t get help. But people can’t support their families on $10, $11, $12 an hour jobs, especially when you add transport, clothes, rent.” said Carolyn McLaughlin, executive director of BronxWorks, a social services organization in New York.

Basically, food stamps have become a “low wage support program”:

Over the past 20 years, the characteristics of the program’s recipients have changed. In 1989, a higher percentage were on benefits than working, but as of 2009 a higher percentage had earned income.

“SNAP is increasingly work support,” said Ed Bolen, an analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

And that’s only likely to get worse: So far in the recovery, jobs growth has been concentrated in lower-wage occupations, with minimal growth in middle-income wages as many higher-paid blue collar jobs have disappeared.

And 6 percent of the 72.9 million Americans paid by the hour received wages at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour in 2010. That’s up from 4.9 percent in 2009, and 3 percent in 2002, according to government data.

Bolen said just based on income, minimum wage single parents are almost always eligible for food stamps.

“This becomes an implicit subsidy for low-wage jobs and in terms of incentives for higher wage job creation that really is not a good thing,” said Arindrajit Dube, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, whose research shows raising the minimum wage would spur economic activity.

To phrase this another way, the service industries’ profits are subsidized by the food stamp program, along with other social services such as Medicaid and SCHIP. If a worker is earning eight dollars per hour at forty hours per week (if he can find forty hours of work in this economy), SNAP alone accounts for fifteen percent of that person’s gross income*. When you factor in other supports (Medicaid, SCHIP, Section 8, and the Earned Income Tax Credit), that percentage increases dramatically.

If these corporations didn’t receive subsidies and had to foot the bill for even the mediocre subsidies, they would be broke, or else have to raise prices–meaning your low prices are someone else’s poverty wage and welfare** dependency. Shrieking “Get a job, you bum” or “Stop freeloading” isn’t appropriate here, since American consumers, in many cases, are aiding and abetting this outcome (besides, the working poor are working). This is a result of specific political choices, such as weakening private sector unions–these jobs are not an ‘organic’ result of the market.

But government jobs with decent benefits and salaries are evil. And socialist. Or something.

*Don’t forget that all wages are taxed at 7.25% through the payroll tax. No exceptions.

**I’m using welfare colloquially to describe the entire system of social supports.